3 ms·

> so you can't get a ban/termination for violating a void clause > they still can decide to not do business with you What's the difference? > in countries wh

> so you can't get a ban/termination for violating a void clause > they still can decide to not do business with you What's the difference? > in countries where such a clause is valid/not-void, you very well can be sued for using Claude Code to work on/develop e.g. Open Code... Has anyone in any country ever got successfully sued for violating ToS terms like these? Try to read any ToS and think that average use doesn't violate at least some of them. Even the EU's own site contains things like "including but not limited to". [1]: https://europass.europa.eu/en/node/2161 https://europass.europa.eu/en/node/2161

dathinab 9mo ago
> Has anyone in any country ever got successfully sued for violating ToS terms like these? yes, less private people but definitely companies > What's the difference? e.g. YT had been forced to reinstate (and not shadow ban) channels in the EU multiple times because judges ruled that terminations did not had legal basis and they don't have the right to arbitrarily refuse doing business with the people in question (for various reasons, including but not limited to it being clearly a retaliation for suing for right you have. Through the market dominant position of YT also played a non negligible role there). Or in other words, by itself it might not mean much but in combination with other laws, especially iff claude code because the marked dominant AI editor.
- YetAnotherNick 9mo ago
  Source: Just believe me?